Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H-CF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 16%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 64%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (16th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 84 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 51.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics18.1% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive37.7% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (46%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemGigabyte A320M-S2H
MotherboardGigabyte GA-A320M-S2H-CF  (all builds)
Memory11.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190823
Uptime0.8 Days
Run DateMay 14 '21 at 14:35
Run Duration116 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU 46%

 PC Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)

Actual performance vs. expectations. The graphs show user score (x) vs user score frequency (y).

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G-$104
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
51.6% Above average
Memory 59.1
1-Core 89.7
2-Core 179
60% 109 Pts
4-Core 239
8-Core 347
37% 293 Pts
64-Core 374
23% 374 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 51.6%
Great: 72%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon RX 560-B
PwrHis(1787 3000) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1176 MHz, MLim: 1500 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 21.4.1
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
18.1% Very poor
Lighting 21.7
Reflection 41.5
Parallax 30.3
18% 31.2 fps
MRender 25.7
Gravity 23.6
Splatting 20.6
19% 23.3 fps
Poor: 17%
This bench: 18.1%
Great: 22%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Asboard 120GB 120GB
55GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S0222A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 96 28 16 45 36 34 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
37.7% Below average
Read 442
Write 359
Mixed 50.1
SusWrite 42.6
49% 223 MB/s
4K Read 17.9
4K Write 32.7
4K Mixed 7.7
54% 19.4 MB/s
DQ Read 60.1
DQ Write 22.7
DQ Mixed 0.5
11% 27.8 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 37.7%
Great: 89%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown NMUD480E82-3200D NMUD480E82-3200 16GB
2400, 2400 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
72.5% Very good
MC Read 27.6
MC Write 27.5
MC Mixed 25.4
77% 26.8 GB/s
SC Read 16.8
SC Write 23.6
SC Mixed 21.1
59% 20.5 GB/s
Latency 130
31% 130 ns
Poor: 86%
This bench: 72.5%
Great: 108%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical GA-A320M-S2H-CF Builds (Compare 7,704 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 39%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 36%
Jet ski

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H-CF - $70

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 90% - Outstanding Total price: $413
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback